On advertorials and “advertarticles”

By Stuart E. Mirvis, MD, FACR

Dr. Mirvis
is the Editor-in-Chief of this journal and Professor of
Radiology, Diagnostic Imaging Department, University of Maryland
Medical Center, Baltimore, MD.

A recent letter to
Applied Radiology
brought my attention to the November 2003 issue.
1
The issue, the letter pointed out, contained an "advertorial." The
writer opined that there is really no such thing: there are ads and
there are editorials (or articles). This advertisement was produced
on colored background, but was laid out in the format of an article
using the same font and including an introduction and concluding
paragraph. At the top of the piece was a banner titled
"advertorial." While most readers probably recognized they were
reading an ad, it might have been possible to mistake the material
as peer-reviewed with unbiased scientific credibility and, thus,
give it more credence. It was certainly not our intention to
deceive anyone about the nature of the ad, but our appreciation of
the potential for misunderstanding and scrutiny could have been
tighter.

Increasingly, magazines and journals present advertising
material in such a fashion as to make the distinction between
article and ad vague at best. Sometimes these are multipage
sections that point out, usually in small type, that the material
is indeed a "special" advertising section and not an article
meeting the standards established for publication. Almost weekly,
the local version of a popular national news magazine that I
receive features magnificent multipage "articles" describing the
wonders of the University of Maryland Medical Center written to
attract patients. These sections are not at all fictional (that's
one for the CEO), but are written by our advertising company with a
very definite flattering bias. They could easily be mistaken for
articles, an error that advertisers would certainly not
protest.

The goal of
Applied Radiology
continues to be the presentation of state-of-the-art review
articles written by experts in their specialties, technology
updates, consideration of practice issues, discussions concerning
controversies in our field, and a steady stream of both routine and
challenging case reports.
Applied Radiology
is provided without charge to most North American radiologists who
wish to receive it. Naturally, there is some friction between the
goal of satisfying advertisers in this widely distributed journal
and raising revenues to keep the presses rolling, and at the same
time be true to our editorial guidelines by never merging product
information in ads with journal articles.

Both goals can be accomplished. In the future, all
advertisements will be clearly and unequivocally demarcated by a
different typeface, layout, and color. Our advertisers are welcome
to present as much data about their products as they wish and to
document that information with referenced scientific studies as
appropriate. Articles that consider the experience of investigators
using new devices or techniques will be permitted to publish their
observations given that any relationship with the product vendor is
made clear and that there is a balanced presentation considering
any strengths and drawbacks of the product or technique. It is the
hope at
Applied Radiology
that these guidelines will remove any potential for
misunderstanding or confusion concerning the source of written
material in
Applied Radiology
. No "advert- articles" allowed! We hope the ads will keep coming
to fund the valuable articles our journal brings to our readers,
but we will not compromise the quality of our publication just to
pay the phone bill.

1
Letter to the editor from Brian D. Coley, MD, Assistant Chief,
Department of Radiology, Columbus Children's Hospital, Clinical
Associate Professor of Radiology and Pediatrics, The Ohio State
University School of Medicine, Columbus, OH.